IMO, the Lakers should ride out Bynum's immature stage. Not because he will be dominant like Shaq necessarily but he has major potential and hasn't peaked yet, and the worst thing that he has done, isn't really much to write home about.

Even if he turns out not to be a franchise player, it doesn't mean he can't have tremendous value to a team.

^ Come on. That is a terrible idea. What purpose would that serve? If you want to keep him you gotta pick up his option. If you want to trade him, you gotta pick it up too. There is almost no basketball benefit in letting him walk other than saving some money.

JGC wrote:^ Come on. That is a terrible idea. What purpose would that serve? If you want to keep him you gotta pick up his option. If you want to trade him, you gotta pick it up too. There is almost no basketball benefit in letting him walk other than saving some money.

Doc Brown wrote:I don't think they should have picked up his option, let him walk.

Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.

He never going to be like Shaq, its quite difficult to be a Shaq, there wasn't even a Shaq before Shaq. With that said, I would keep him but not at all cost. If there is a chance to get Deron which involves Bynum I would do it.

khmrP wrote:He never going to be like Shaq, its quite difficult to be a Shaq, there wasn't even a Shaq before Shaq. With that said, I would keep him but not at all cost. If there is a chance to get Deron which involves Bynum I would do it.

If it doesn't matter who wins then why do they keep score?Is it possible to have 2 G.O.A.T.'s

He's 24, an all-star, coming off an all-nba second team selection, and averaged 19/12, is widely regarded as one the second best Center in the game. I don't think we could get anywhere near equal value by moving him. Unless we included Kobe...